Lawmakers Act to Impose Controls on TV Violence

WASHINGTON —  Just days after a key senator warned of a coming congressional crackdown on televised violence, lawmakers motivated by the issue moved Thursday to impose greater federal controls on the TV industry.

Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass) introduced legislation that would require new TV sets to come equipped with a computer chip enabling parents to block violent programming.

“Televised violence is ubiquitous and insidious,” Markey said at a news conference. “Even the most conscientious parents are often powerless to monitor their children’s viewing all week long, leaving them susceptible to the excessive level of ‘murder and mayhem’ that comes over the air and through the cable.”

Markey, who is chairman of the powerful House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance, added that many other lawmakers are clamoring for action: “Dozens of members not on my committee have approached me on these issues.”

Indeed, on Tuesday Rep. John Bryant (D-Tex.) introduced a measure under which TV station owners could lose their license and face fines of up to $25,000 for violating anti-violence standards that the bill would establish. Markey and Bryant acted following months of hearings on television violence and a recent announcement by the networks that they will warn viewers before airing violent programs. On Capitol Hill, that action is considered by many too little, too late.

Even TV industry officials believe Markey’s bill has significant political support. But both the broadcast and TV-manufacturing industries oppose it. Set makers say it would require a redesign of some components and raise the cost of sets. It would also require the cooperation of the broadcasting and cable industry to transmit signals that would trigger the electronic devices in TV sets that block the reception of violent programming.

Bryant’s bill--which is said to face mixed prospects in Congress and a possible First Amendment challenge--would require the Federal Communications Commission to write rules regulating violent programming. The legislative initiatives come in the wake of an industrywide conference on TV violence held Monday in Beverly Hills. Sen. Paul Simon (D-Ill.), the keynote speaker, bluntly warned that if the industry did not act fast to reduce TV violence, Congress would tackle the job.

But at that conference, several network representatives argued that violence in society cannot solely be laid in the lap of the TV industry.

“Reducing the problems of violence in the United States must be the responsibility of every segment of society from parents and teachers to our community and national leaders,” NBC stated in its briefing book for the meeting.

NBC Senior Vice President Judy A. Smith on Thursday called the lawmakers’ anti-TV violence effort “a rush to judgment. The four broadcast networks have taken significant steps to address the issue of violence on television.”

Yet Bryant and Markey say the networks have done little since Congress voted several years ago to give them antitrust exemptions so they could meet to try and resolve public concerns about violent programming. “They did nothing about it until hearings were held on the matter,” Bryant said. “Their guidelines are more than ineffective.”

Opponents of the legislative solutions being offered say they won’t work either. Kelly T. Williams, manager of TV engineering for the National Assn. of Broadcasters, a trade group, said the new TV technology called for in Markey’s bill will present “an incredible logistical problem” for local broadcasters, who would have to spend $7,000 to $9,000 to buy new signaling equipment. They would also have to peruse old programs to determine which require a violence warning.

Some of Bryant’s congressional colleagues worried about the soundness of regulating the content of violent programming. Markey’s bill “is a more effective approach than the Bryant bill,” Mike Oxley (R-Ohio) said.

Still, Gary Shapiro, group vice president of the Electronic Industries Assn. in Washington, says all the electronic razzle-dazzle called for in Markey’s bill may do more to frustrate technologically inept parents than their technologically savvy offspring.

“They presume that parents are more technologically sophisticated than their kids. But I think it’s clear that kids are much more capable with VCRs and computers” than older Americans. If manufacturers devise a technology sophisticated enough to outsmart precocious children, he asked, “how are the parents going to figure it out?”